Where can the iPod nano go from here?

iPod nano stock is dwindling, signaling a possible update.

There may not be much Apple can do to improve on its sixth-gen iPod nano, but we have a few ideas.

Jacqui Cheng

Stocks of the iPod nano appear to be dwindling at retailers across the country, suggesting that Apple is planning to update the tiny music player soon. 9to5Mac spotted shortages at Amazon, Target, Walmart, and Best Buy—a common indicator that a product is about to be refreshed by Apple.

The sixth-generation iPod nano was released in 2010, a radical departure from previous nanos. Not much larger than the iPod shuffle, the sixth-gen nano is dominated by a small square touchscreen with limited multitouch abilities. Though it includes an iOS-like interface, it still runs the same Pixo OS that powered previous nanos as well as the iPod classic.

Apple didn't bother updating the nano (or really, any iPods) in 2011 aside from a slight price drop and a few software changes, such as the addition of a Nike+ fitness app. But the short supply of the current nano suggests Apple may have something more in store this year.

Where exactly Apple could go with the nano, though, isn't clear. Apple embraced the small "watchband" industry that sprung up around the sixth-gen nano by adding several user-selectable "watch faces" for the built-in clock. A source for iLounge has suggested that Apple may extend the smart watch concept further by adding low-power Bluetooth 4.0, enabling a nano to connect to an iOS device like an iPhone running iOS 6.

"The feature would enable a future iPod nano to display iMessages received by an iPhone, record voice memos that could be shared via the iPhone, and even initiate phone calls through its own headphones," according to iLounge's source.

Bluetooth 4.0 would also extend the iPod nano's fitness tracking capabilities, allowing it to connect to a wide range of sensors and monitors, like cadence sensors for bicycles or heart rate monitors used to track cardio fitness.

Another possibility is the addition of camera hardware. The fifth-generation iPod nano model included an inexpensive video camera, so it wouldn't be entirely surprising for Apple to include something similar in a newer, updated nano. A leaked prototype suggests Apple has already experimented with this idea as well.

The video feature of the previous nano doesn't appear to have been all that popular—Apple did, after all, see fit to exclude it from the sixth-gen device. However, we think if the company does add a camera, it will probably include still image capture, even if it's low resolution. As some photographers are wont to say, the best camera is the one you have with you, and we think a camera feature could be a hit with younger kids. (Anecdotally, the iPod nano's video camera seemed to be a hit among the kids of Ars staffers; there was a bit of a crisis once the camera disappeared from the latest model.)

Considering the nano's small size and $129 starting price, though, don't expect anything better than what the iPod touch currently includes. There's simply no room for the kind of high-quality camera module included in the iPhone, but something like the 6.5 × 6.5 × 3.3mm module could probably just fit in a nano.

Finally, Apple may end up opening the iPod nano to developers. As we noted, it doesn't currently run iOS (even though it looks like it does), so developers may not be able to easily port over existing apps. But it does use a processor similar to the early iPod touch, so perhaps Apple could shoehorn in a cut-down version of iOS just for the nano—at least, enough for developers to get creative. Or Apple may offer an iPod nano-specific SDK as it did in the past for developing games for older iPods. Either way, we suspect that letting third-party developers extend the device could make it more appealing to a wider variety of users.

Apple is expected to hold a media event on September 12 to announce a new iPhone, and it's likely that any iPod announcements for the year would also happen at that time. What would Apple have to announce to make the iPod nano a compelling product for you? Let us know in the comments.

Promoted Comments

More than anything, I'd like to see GPS support for Nike+. I love running with my iPod nano, but the foot sensor is nowhere near accurate enough unless you run at the same pace every day. The iPhone Nike+ GPS app is ok, but the iPhone is too clunky to run with (especially if the next iPhone is bigger).

I don't care if it's an extra module that connects via the dock connector, but GPS would make the iPod nano perfect for runners. The inclusion of wifi for wireless syncing would be excellent too. I don't care if they have to make the device larger to accommodate this, as long as it's still comfortable to run with.

Go ahead, I'll wait till the iPod Bio II comes out. It'll have better storage and a nice camera. Plus I heard they are working on linking it to your brain to improve storage capacity (talk about getting a song stuck in your head).

I've seen some full-featured (but low powered) android "watches" that are this size but will run a ton of different apps. some of them even have bluetooth connectivity to smartphones that allow internet for things like the weather, twitter feeds or stock indicators.

The nano occupies a different space in the market but I wonder if they intend to add nano apps.

More than anything, I'd like to see GPS support for Nike+. I love running with my iPod nano, but the foot sensor is nowhere near accurate enough unless you run at the same pace every day. The iPhone Nike+ GPS app is ok, but the iPhone is too clunky to run with (especially if the next iPhone is bigger).

I don't care if it's an extra module that connects via the dock connector, but GPS would make the iPod nano perfect for runners. The inclusion of wifi for wireless syncing would be excellent too. I don't care if they have to make the device larger to accommodate this, as long as it's still comfortable to run with.

I'd be all over it if it were allowed to act as a secondary screen for an iphone.

When i'm out cycling and using endomondo the phone goes in my jersey pocket, so if i want to check out how i'm doing or if i've got a bit lost i've got to stop and take it out. If the iphone could stream the route i'm taking to the nano for me to wear on my wrist or on the handlebars that would be fantastic.

More than anything, I'd like to see GPS support for Nike+. I love running with my iPod nano, but the foot sensor is nowhere near accurate enough unless you run at the same pace every day. The iPhone Nike+ GPS app is ok, but the iPhone is too clunky to run with (especially if the next iPhone is bigger).

I don't care if it's an extra module that connects via the dock connector, but GPS would make the iPod nano perfect for runners. The inclusion of wifi for wireless syncing would be excellent too. I don't care if they have to make the device larger to accommodate this, as long as it's still comfortable to run with.

++ on the GPS support and a Nike+ app that is more like the iPhone one. I'd gladly take a larger size to accommodate this, kinda like the older Nano size. Reasonable weatherproofing/sweatproofing would be great too.

Make it a full blown BT watch, with the ability to accept AirPlay: just stream data from your iPhone (be it FaceTime or an app, or whatever).

Agreed with this.

Essentially, all it needs to do is the following:1) Be a peripheral screen for the iPhone/iPad.2) Play music, and track fitness data (since people are unlikely to carry their iPhones when they are out running).

Converting it into primarily a watch makes sense because a watch is one of the few wearable devices that is universally socially acceptable.

Hopefully back to something actually usable... a 64GB capacity within a G4/5 format with real physical controls would be nice, the current Nano is just a piece of junk for those of not interested in flashing it (and don't start me on the crappy headphone remote that supposedly replaces physical controls).

I agree, GPS would be a fantastic addition! It would free most runners from their phones.

GPS antennas can be pretty big energy hogs. I suspect that's the major hurdle here.

Plus without a cell or wifi radio you'd have trouble using it in urban areas (GPS alone requires clear LOS to at least 4 satellites to get a position.) Although, linking it with the iPhone or some other phone would let it crib off that radio, or even the GPS on the device.

Damn, I only just bought one of these (funnily enough, to use as a watch which I can also play my music on) If the update could cross talk with an iphone (similar to what the fossil watches could do with the SE phones) that would have been awesome (I loved my bluetooth watch before the OLED display died in it)

Adding Bluetooth and syncing to an iPhone would pretty much be a kick to the groin of the Pebble watch. Not that Apple shouldn't do it for that reason, and clearly there's a market for it. I just wonder if Apple would be interested in trying to compete in that way.

I do like my Nano, but I haven't updated the music on it since I first loaded it. For some reason iTunes and my PC didn't agree. I'll admit that I haven't tried since, but then reloading an OS isn't something I like to do frequently.

For those of you who want watch versions, do you use bluetooth headphones? I certainly don't want wire dangling from my wrist while I'm running.

Edit: For those who do use bluetooth headphones, do you have a model you like to use while running/exercising?

I used the Sony HBH-IS800's for close to two years, they were great indoors at the gym. But, they did not hold up to sweat very well. The Jaybird JF3 Freedoms are working great so far, the volume is much better as well as audio quality. My only issue with the Jaybird's is the so-called "bump noise" while running.

The Motorola Motoactv is a pretty good example of how much potential there is in small devices, it packs in a cortex A8 processor (TI Omap 3), 256MB ram, 8GB storage, wifi, bluetooth, gps and accelerometer. The watch acts as a bluetooth hub so you connect stereo BT headphones, a heartbeat sensor, cadence sensor (for a bike) and a mobile phone allowing the watch to display text messages, Facebook, Twitter and weather notifications as well as relay calls through to the bluetooth headphones. The device runs Android 2.3 with a 176x220 capacitive touch screen and can upload the workout results over wifi as well as displaying them on the screen complete with little maps.

Much of the functionality is still fairly basic though despite the reasonably powerful processor and Android 2.3 underneath, I think there's potentially a lot more a device like this could do with better software and particularly with bigger phones makes a handly companion.

It's too small for GPS, barring a big breakthrough or permanent watchband.

It's too small for touchscreen apps.

It's too touchy for workouts.

They can't do a camera, the spying and loss of privacy would become a huge deal in schools and provide more negative publicity than sales. Tiny, cloud-connected cameras? Only security organizations want that.

Unless they're mimicking the pebble watch, I think they'll kill it. Ipod sales have been declining, and there's nothing the nano does that their other products don't do better.

At this point, the whole ipod line is in a deadpool. I think the touch, classic and shuffle make more sense as permanent products.

Where else could they take their traditional wifi/usb based mobile units? Mobile payments with touchscreen pin entry? I don't seem them getting into fitness, it's not huge and they have a partnership with Nike. I don't seem them getting into headphones in a big way, that would just picking a fight they shouldn't care about and couldn't add value to. What else is there?

Going back to physical controls would be a HUGE improvement. I find that the controls on the touchscreen nano are unintuitive, confusing, error-prone, frustrating, and inconsistent.

Won't happen. Apple is like Charlie Sheen, they only have one speed. There's no going back.

Agreed, however, that physical controls were superior. I have no need for a fullblown touch inerface in that size, and if I want a music player in that size I'll choose a shuffle. I've actually been shopping around for a decent refurbished older one, sine my 4G Nano got stolen.

The best thing that Apple can do with the ipod Nano is to keep it the way it is before the newest revision. Seriously. You're trying to bring touchscreen, which need an ample area in order to have it be interactive and precise, to a model of ipod whose success hinged on its small size without sacrificing a visual screen.

The one thing that has always annoyed me with touch screens is that once the screen cracks, you're pretty much out of luck: replacing the screen is expensive, and most people don't do it if they can still get a touch response from the screen. I've had a 4th generation ipod nano since it came out, and it has survived multiple impacts without much aesthetic marring. My ipod touch can't say the same.

I've been waiting for a nano with bluetooth for a year now. I almost destroyed my iPhone 4 with sweat damage about a month ago (damn your black heart Incase) and now I can't wait to leave it at home. I already have bluetooth headphones and couldn't justify a nano and a $50 dongle when a refresh was around the corner. I'm not holding my breath for GPS but hopefully the pairing to the Nike+ is better than I've heard from some of the comments.

I could take or leave the notifications or call initiation if there are some smartwatch capabilities but a camera seems like it'd be ergonomically awkward to use. I don't think the iPod line is dead and my experience tells me that there is a market for specific-use devices.

Voice controls. It's to the point that it's too small to control any other way. I find GPS unlikely, as I think GPS chips are still rather large, relatively speaking, but it's not impossible. But I'm with the rest on the watch. A quality "smart" watch is well over due.

Voice controls. It's to the point that it's too small to control any other way. I find GPS unlikely, as I think GPS chips are still rather large, relatively speaking, but it's not impossible. But I'm with the rest on the watch. A quality "smart" watch is well over due.

If they add voice as a gimmick, that's fine. I don't want it as the primary control method.